Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Apple M1 Max Geekbench Score

browser.geekbench.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

421–430 of 917 posts

Re: Apple M1 Max Geekbench Score

#421

Post by EvgeniyZh »

foldr wrote: post #378
EvgeniyZh wrote: post #278

Top intel mobile processor appears to be https://browser.geekbench.com/v5/cpu/10431820 M1 Max gives 9% boost for single-core and 34% for multicore, with similar or larger (?) TDP -- Intel is 35-45 W, M1 Max is 60W but I assume some of it (a lot?) goes to GPU. Impressive, but probably wouldn't be called revolution if came from Intel.

If the TDP was really the same we’d be seeing Intel laptops with 20 hour battery lives.

Battery life is more about idle/low load TDP, not full load TDP. It's not like MBP has 60*20=1200 Wh battery (100Wh is FAA limit)

Re: Apple M1 Max Geekbench Score

#422

Post by hajile »

spitfire wrote: post #397

What am I missing here? The marketing presentations spoke about 200GB/sec and 400GB/sec parts. Existing CPU's generally have 10s of GB/sec. But I see these parts beating out existing parts by small margins - 100% at best. Where is all that bandwidth going? Are none of these synthetic benchmarks stressing memory IO that much? Surely compression should benefit from 400GB/sec bandwidth? This also raises the question how…

They have 5.2 and 10.4 TFLOPS of GPU power to feed in addition to 10 very wide cores.

Re: Apple M1 Max Geekbench Score

#423

Post by jjcon »

mciancia wrote: post #419
robertwt7 wrote: post #417

Is that supposed to be fast guys? Isn't that still slower than some ryzen 5 5600x? (my pc uses this but below is not my benchmark) https://browser.geekbench.com/v5/cpu/8238216 I'm not sure how fast or good is that number.. But i've heard good things about m1 and planning to probably upgrade. edit: Not sure what's with the downvotes, i'm genuinely curious. I'm in the apple ecosystem with many apple products, windows p…

> Base Frequency 4.72 GHz > Maximum Frequency 6.03 GHz This was seriously overclocked, wouldn't be surprised if with liquid nitrogen. So probably poor comparison to laptop CPU ;)

We're also seeing slower m1max benchmarks though

https://browser.geekbench.com/v5/cpu/10476727

Re: Apple M1 Max Geekbench Score

#424

Post by PostThisTooFast »

ArchOversight wrote: post #333
KptMarchewa wrote: post #327

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Are you really rendering in a cafe that you need on the go GPU performance?

Editing photos or reviewing them before getting back home to know if you need to re-shoot, reviewing 8K footage on the fly, applying color grading to get an idea of what the final might look like to know if you need to re-shoot, re-light or change something... There are absolutely use-cases where this is going to enable new ways of looking at content and give more control and ability to review stuff in the field.

It has been a long time since editing photos has required anything more than run-of-the-mill performance.

Re: Apple M1 Max Geekbench Score

#425

Post by robertwt7 »

mciancia wrote: post #419
robertwt7 wrote: post #417

Is that supposed to be fast guys? Isn't that still slower than some ryzen 5 5600x? (my pc uses this but below is not my benchmark) https://browser.geekbench.com/v5/cpu/8238216 I'm not sure how fast or good is that number.. But i've heard good things about m1 and planning to probably upgrade. edit: Not sure what's with the downvotes, i'm genuinely curious. I'm in the apple ecosystem with many apple products, windows p…

> Base Frequency 4.72 GHz > Maximum Frequency 6.03 GHz This was seriously overclocked, wouldn't be surprised if with liquid nitrogen. So probably poor comparison to laptop CPU ;)

Ah yes that's true, didn't realise it was overclocked.

Probably good to compare to those ryzen in laptop..

Re: Apple M1 Max Geekbench Score

#426

Post by cschmid »

m15i wrote: post #346
cschmid wrote: post #306

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I know this doesn't answer your question, but can I just ask (out of curiosity) why you're training ML models on a laptop?

It’s all about the RAM. 64GB would allow input of larger image sizes and/or nets with more parameters. Right now, the consumer card with the most RAM is the rtx 3090 which is only 24GB, and in my opinion overpriced and inefficient in terms of wattage (~350W). Even the ~$6000 RTX A6000 cards are only 48GB.

I don't think replacing a workstation with a Macbook because of RAM makes too much sense: If running one minibatch of your model already takes up all the memory you have, where would the rest of your training data sit? In the M1, you don't have a separate main memory.

Also, software support for accelerated training on Apple hardware is extremely limited: Out of the main frameworks, only tensorflow seems to target it, and even there, the issues you'll face won't be high on the priority list.

I know that nvidia GPUs are very expensive, but if you're really serious about training a large model, the only alternative would be paying rent to Google.

Re: Apple M1 Max Geekbench Score

#427

Post by fnord77 »

PragmaticPulp wrote: post #245
blakesterz wrote: post #100

I just can't figure out what I'm missing on the "M1 is so fast" side of things. For years I worked* on an Ubuntu desktop machine I built myself. Early this year I switched to a brand new M1 mini and this this is slower and less reliable than the thing I built myself that runs Ubuntu. My Ubuntu machine had a few little issues every no and then. My Mini has weird bugs all the time. e.g. Green Screen Crashes when I have…

> I just can't figure out what I'm missing on the "M1 is so fast" side of things. Two reasons: 1. M1 is a super fast laptop chip. It provides mid-range desktop performance in a laptop form factor with mostly fanless operation. No matter how you look at it, that's impressive. 2. Apple really dragged their feet on updating the old Intel Macs before the transition. People in the Mac world (excluding hackintosh) were stu…

> Compared to those older CPUs, the M1 Max is a huge leap forward.

Is it, though? Its single-core score is roughly 2x that of the top CPU Apple put in the mid-2012 macbook pro. 2x after 10 years doesn't seem that great to me.

Maybe that's more of an indictment against intel

Re: Apple M1 Max Geekbench Score

#428

Post by [deleted] »

derefr wrote: post #410
jjcon wrote: post #284

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> GPU capabilities that blow everything away Compared to previous macs and igpus - an nvidia gpu will still run circles arounnd this thing

> an nvidia gpu will still run circles arounnd this thing Not for loading up models larger than 32GB it wouldn't. (They exist! That's what the "full-detail model of the starship Enterprise" thing in the keynote was about.) Remember that on any computer without unified memory, you can only load a scene the size of the GPU's VRAM. No matter how much main memory you have to swap against, no matter how many GPUs you thro…

[deleted]

Re: Apple M1 Max Geekbench Score

#429

Post by outside1234 »

2OEH8eoCRo0 wrote: post #350
blakesterz wrote: post #100

I just can't figure out what I'm missing on the "M1 is so fast" side of things. For years I worked* on an Ubuntu desktop machine I built myself. Early this year I switched to a brand new M1 mini and this this is slower and less reliable than the thing I built myself that runs Ubuntu. My Ubuntu machine had a few little issues every no and then. My Mini has weird bugs all the time. e.g. Green Screen Crashes when I have…

Meh. The M1 is a node ahead and memory is placed on package. I'm trying not to be dazzled by the tech when it comes at the price of freedom.

Ok - I get that comment for iPhone - but what is less free about the Mac vs. a PC?
Post reply on HN